1 CGHC010367002026 2026:CGHC:41483 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4785 of 2026 Tetoo Ram S/o Late Shyam Bihari Aged About 72 Years Caste Scheduled Tribe Resident Of Village- Nawapara, Tahsil- Dabhra, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Department Of Water Resource, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Dabhra District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh 5 - Engineer In Chief Wrd Office At Shivnath Bhawan Nawa Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Survey And Bairage Construction Division No. 1, Kharsiya District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioner : Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, Advocate. For State : Mr. Anmol Sharma, PL Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 24.09.2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents for deciding claim u/s 73 of Act, 2013 within Time Frame. 10.2 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to pass similar order in terms of WPC No 1733/2026 (ΑΝΝEXURE P/3) 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner. “ 2. Facts of the case, as projected, are that the petitioner owner of land bearing Khasra No. 385/1, admeasuring 0.202 hectare, situated at Village Nawapara, Tahsil Dabhara, District Sakti (C.G.). The said land wwas acquired for construction of Saradih Bairaj over the Mahanadi River pursuant to award dated 31.03.2017 passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 27/A-82/2012-13. It is the case of the petitioner that the compensation determined under the said award was inadequate. It is further stated that in respect of the same acquisition proceedings, one similarly situated land loser, namely Padum Kunwar, had sought reference under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and the matter ultimately culminated in a decision of this Court 3 enhancing compensation. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner has submitted an application under Section 73 of the Act of 2013 before the competent authority seeking re-determination of compensation on the basis of the enhanced award. However, the said application is still pending consideration. Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of his application. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s land was acquired under the same notification and award as in the case of other land losers, who have already been granted enhanced compensation by virtue of judicial orders. It is contended that under Section 73 of the Act of 2013, the petitioner are entitled to seek re-determination of compensation. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already filed an application before the competent authority, however, the same has not been decided till date. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is pressing a limited relief for direction to the concerned authority to decide his application within a stipulated time. 4. Learned State counsel submits that if the petitioner has filed an application under Section 73 of the Act of 2013, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law. He has no objection if an appropriate direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the said application. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4 6. Considering the facts of the case, particularly the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the concerned authority. 7. Accordingly, respondent No. 4/Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Dabhara, District Sakti (C.G.) is directed to consider and decide the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 73 of the Act of 2013 expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/submission of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law 8. It is further directed that while deciding the application, the authority shall take into consideration the judgment rendered by this Court in similar matters, including the decision in FAM No. 2/2023 and connected cases. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of at the motion stage. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge AMIT PATEL